New BOF Membership proposals

[graeme]

What are the reasons for making everyone join BOF (i.e. not allowing the club only membership)?

1. Because orienteering has more clout with sports councils if it (i.e. BOF) has more members. In the short term, BOF would be better off if it declared all non-BOF club members to be BOF members, without charging them more. Obviously in the long term this is unsustainable, as everyone will want the free membership! The challenge is to make sure the sports council recognises the true size of the sport.

2. To target mailings and information. As Ed's fell running experience
shows, clubs are not always that good at it.

3. To raise more cash. To be honest, I don't think this is the main motivation.

4. To raise their own importance (an inevitable feature even of the best organisations)

If, as I suspect, 1. is the main motivation, there will once again be friction between England and Scotland. The scottish sports council cares about SOA membership not BOF membership, so the Scots have less to gain from everyone being BOF members (especially after a recent fight to make everyone automatically SOA members).

Graeme

[graeme]

That's an interesting thought - and if that happened would people in england be able to join Scottish clubs under the SOA instead of being members of BOF? introduce a bit of free market economy?

This has been the consequence of the hill-running debacle in Scotland. Many hill runners joined the (English) FRA not the Scottish athletics league.

Meanwhile many events simply declare themselves to be non-SAL events.
If BOF isn't valued, clubs will just put on BOF-unsanctioned "map and compass" races (Indeed, NATO already do this with the "Phoenix long-O", opting for it to be an FRA event not a BOF one).


Graeme

[Kitch]

Note
SAL is Scottish Athletics Limited
which tells you a few things.

[Bored at work]

1. Because orienteering has more clout with sports councils if it (i.e. BOF) has more members. In the short term, BOF would be better off if it declared all non-BOF club members to be BOF members, without charging them more. Obviously in the long term this is unsustainable, as everyone will want the free membership! The challenge is to make sure the sports council recognises the true size of the sport.

Out of interest: How many people do belong to orienteering clubs who are not also members of BOF? Is it a high percentage?

[redkite]

swoc has very few. We had one family just starting the sport, but i think they have now joined BOF

[PorkyFatBoy]

For our club -

Single members 30% local only
Family members 48% local only

of whom about 30% are regular competitiors

Does this reflect the fact that singles are more competitive, or that families have other commitments?

[FatBoy]

The British Canoe Union costs £13 for family for recreational use (more for competative members

Yes try £30 per adult for competitive purposes or insurance purposes more to the point. This year I've done 7 races of 2 runs each of about 2.5 mins. That's nearly a quid a minute! Then we'll add the boat I trashed at the last race of £380 (second hand) and the extra fuel because of the limited number of venues races are held at etc etc.

More to the point though of whether it's good value for money compared to other sports or not, or what BOF are planning to do with the money: How the is making it more expensive when you're starting out in orienteering going to get more people into the sport???

[PorkyFatBoy]

Maybe BOF are using the council as a sounding board, and if there is sufficient dissention it won't happen. I don't recall seeing anything about it in the recent mailing to club secretaries (just enough JK leaflets for two each for those of us likely to go).

Once again, this issue with BOF seems to a lack of communication, when they should be in overdrive given the number of recent changes made or planned.

The role that BOF play for our sport should be visible - I couldn't provide a BOF list like Mrs H did for BCU, but we could all probably list a few membership "benefits" that I don't need (affinity credit cards for one).

Ooo... I feel a Peter G BOF Bashing motif coming

[Mrs H.]

This arrived today from my mole at the recent WMOA meeting:

"3. BOF Membership: Council is considering BOF membership arrangements (again).  Should all orienteers be BOF members?  (Those presently non-members will pay more, but as the cost of BOF is spread, existing members will pay less).  Or should clubs be BOF members, rather than individuals?  (BOF could administer membership for clubs).  Interestingly, OD have not had an adverse reaction since applying their policy that all OD members must be BOF members."

Why do I find "existing members will pay less" slightly improbable

Actually i can provide a list for BOF:


Why become a member?

* Major Events - (Jan Kjellström Festival, British Orienteering Championships, British Elite Orienteering Championships, British Night Orienteering Championships, Harvester Relays)
* National Competitions - (Compass Sport Cup, Future Champions Cup, Junior Team Relay …)
* National Badge And Ranking Schemes
* Opportunities for National and International Coaching and Competition
* Members Magazine and Fixtures List. 4 x per annum
* Route Choice 5 - Junior Magazine. 3 x per annum
* Information for members including the orienteering website
* Books, Videos and leaflets for sale, Videos for hire
* Variety of merchandise
* BOF Credit Card
* Member discounts with many national companies

[PeterG]

Ooo... I feel a Peter G BOF Bashing motif coming

Just for you

[PorkyFatBoy]

That's the one

[Seamus]

The question I want to know will this mean we pay a larger membership fee in the end? when I join my club (and BOF when it comes into effect) will I be paying less as I do now to join BOF and my club?

it would be good, if, there is a small up front fee front fee (the club & BOF memebership, less than now) and the event levies are increased to cover the loss in income, it will encourage a pay as you run aspect to it. So the people who run more will pay a great share of BOF fees than the less regular and beginning orienteers would pay overall less than now (well that's what should happen).

the sur-charge covers the cost (maybe not the actuall direct cost) that BOF covers for non-members to run at events. As BOF covers things like insurance at events, coaching develpoment, impliment rules and in a way direct and govern the sport. Also adds a financial incentive to join BOF.

I do think £3 is a bit steep, would like it to the £1 that FRA charge at races. That would less likely to discourage people.

*Bit Random*
I used to go on about 'pay as you play' at Sheffield Uni, when you used to have clubs (not the orienteering club i should point out, they were very good), that would fleece the less regular/committed members for high membership fees to help subsidise the players who played week in week out. eg. sheffield uni football club would charge everyone 75+ GBP to join the club, have a 150 members and only offer 4 teams to play in. It meant that over half who had paid their money would have no chance of playing football.

Should the regular BOF members be susdised by the occasional BOF members? Should the we subsidise regular non-BOF members?

[FatBoy]

The role that BOF play for our sport should be visible - I couldn't provide a BOF list like Mrs H did for BCU, but we could all probably list a few membership "benefits" that I don't need (affinity credit cards for one).

Actually BCU do an affinity credit card too

[awk]

Maybe BOF are using the council as a sounding board, and if there is sufficient dissention it won't happen.

Almost certainly. What usually happens is that professional staff are asked by Council (or a specialist committee) to make some proposals in line with a policy (Mrs H. states that this is in the strategic plan). Staff then put those proposals to Council/committee for discussion. Depending on the outcome of those discussions, proposals then go to regions for further discussion (which should involve club reps taking them to clubs). Results then go back up the chain. Depending on feedback, a decision will either be taken at council/committee or, if required, taken to an AGM.

I agree the timing is tight, but it's do-able.

At each stage you, the BOF member, have a voice. You have a rep on Council, you have a rep at regional committee, you have a voice at club level. And you have a vote at the AGM.

No the system is anything but perfect, and things do go wrong, but, as a club member, it's a damn sight more inclusive than virtually anything else I've seen in any other sport. (And as a result, presents a regular nightmare to staff, who struggle every inch of the way to get anything done, and woe betide you if you want to instigate any real change!).

So....the chances are the reason we've not seen any detailed proposals is that because there aren't any yet, or if they are, they are very much in draft stage, and need to go past the first level of consultation. So, as I said earlier, I'll wait and see.

What is the corresponding club membership rates in other sports? And how do entry fees compare?
.

To answer your specific question from my recent experience;

Hockey: senior club membership fee £105 for one year. Match fees: £6 per match. Training fees: £2 per session (weekly).

Table Tennis: senior club membership fee: £20. Match fees: £3 per match. Training fees: £3 per session (weekly).

HTH

Andrew

[RFM]

This is my first posting, so an introduction – I am a BOF Vice-Chair and Chair of the recently-formed Event Operations Committee. I also chaired the group which put together the proposals on BOF membership.

I only caught up with this thread on Friday and didn’t reply immediately as we had BOF Council yesterday at which I made a presentation and we had a lively discussion. Much of the comment here has been around the apparent lack of consultation but, as Andrew said, we have a process to go through before releasing something on which to consult. This included my presentation to the AGM earlier in the year, discussion by Council in May and Management Committee on several occasions, and a group meeting to put together the proposal. It was then put to your elected representatives at Council for comment before being more widely circulated for consultation.

Included in my presentation yesterday was a timetable for discussion. The proposal will be made available on the BOF web site later this week and a mailing to Clubs and Associations will ask for comments by mid November so that they can be considered by Management Committee in December and a revised proposal put to Council in January. However, if people want to continue to provide comments after this it will help inform the way I introduce the proposal to Council, which will be asked to agree what will go to the AGM in March.

The AGM will give members the opportunity to discuss and vote on the proposal, though the main impact will be on non-members and club-only members. We have asked Association reps to take the proposal back to their regional meetings and to encourage Clubs to discuss it and provide them with feedback.

I won’t go into details of the proposal at this stage though will happily clarify things later. However, the questions I put to Council were “What do you think of the proposal?” and “If you do not like it, what is the viable alternative?” Doing nothing is not an option so we need positive suggestions on how to finance the Federation in the future in line with the Strategic Plan agreed by Council earlier in the year.

I have found the discussion here interesting and valuable, and quoted extensively from it during my presentation yesterday – so keep it up!

Ranald